Prescribing for Children With Rheumatic Disease: Perceived Treatment Approaches Between Pediatric and Adult Rheumatologists

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/141687/1/acr23273.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/141687/2/acr23273_am.pd

Anesthesia for intra-articular corticosteroid injections in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: A survey of pediatric rheumatologists

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To determine the methods of anesthesia currently being used by pediatric rheumatologists when performing intra-articular corticosteroid injections (IACI).</p> <p>Study design</p> <p>A questionnaire was emailed to all members of the Childhood Arthritis & Rheumatology Research Alliance, a pediatric rheumatology research network in North America. The questionnaire consisted of 11 questions ranging from procedure technique, treatments prescribed for topical anesthesia and oral analgesia, and factors that might affect procedural pain.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy-four of 161 physicians (46%) responded to the questionnaire. On average, each physician injected 33 children (median 25, range 1-160) and 43 joints (median 30, range 1-150) yearly. Local anesthesia was used in children on average ≥ 8 years (range 2-16 years), with general anesthesia being more frequently used for younger children. All respondents used local anesthesia. The most commonly used methods of local anesthesia were EMLA^®cream plus subcutaneous lidocaine (58.8%), ethyl chloride spray only (39.7%), EMLA^®cream only (33.8%), subcutaneous lidocaine only (25%), and lidocaine iontophoresis only (11.8%). Buffering of the lidocaine was routinely done only 7.4% of the time.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although pediatric rheumatologists in North America perform IACI on a large number of patients each year, a wide variety of methods are used to deliver local anesthesia with no accepted standard of care. More studies are needed to determine the optimal method of local anesthesia delivery to minimize pain associated with IACI.</p

An exploration of parents’ preferences for foot care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a possible role for the discrete choice experiment

Background: An increased awareness of patients’ and parents’ care preferences regarding foot care is desirable from a clinical perspective as such information may be utilised to optimise care delivery. The aim of this study was to examine parents’ preferences for, and valuations of foot care and foot-related outcomes in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) incorporating willingness-to-pay (WTP) questions was conducted by surveying 42 parents of children with JIA who were enrolled in a randomised-controlled trial of multidisciplinary foot care at a single UK paediatric rheumatology outpatients department. Attributes explored were: levels of pain; mobility; ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL); waiting time; referral route; and footwear. The DCE was administered at trial baseline. DCE data were analysed using a multinomial-logit-regression model to estimate preferences and relative importance of attributes of foot care. A stated-preference WTP question was presented to estimate parents’ monetary valuation of health and service improvements.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Results: Every attribute in the DCE was statistically significant (p &#60; 0.01) except that of cost (p = 0.118), suggesting that all attributes, except cost, have an impact on parents’ preferences for foot care for their child. The magnitudes of the coefficients indicate that the strength of preference for each attribute was (in descending order): improved ability to perform ADL, reductions in foot pain, improved mobility, improved ability to wear desired footwear, multidisciplinary foot care route, and reduced waiting time. Parents’ estimated mean annual WTP for a multidisciplinary foot care service was £1,119.05.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Conclusions: In terms of foot care service provision for children with JIA, parents appear to prefer improvements in health outcomes over non-health outcomes and service process attributes. Cost was relatively less important than other attributes suggesting that it does not appear to impact on parents’ preferences.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt

17 ways to say yes:Toward nuanced tone of voice in AAC and speech technology

People with complex communication needs who use speech-generating devices have very little expressive control over their tone of voice. Despite its importance in human interaction, the issue of tone of voice remains all but absent from AAC research and development however. In this paper, we describe three interdisciplinary projects, past, present and future: The critical design collection Six Speaking Chairs has provoked deeper discussion and inspired a social model of tone of voice; the speculative concept Speech Hedge illustrates challenges and opportunities in designing more expressive user interfaces; the pilot project Tonetable could enable participatory research and seed a research network around tone of voice. We speculate that more radical interactions might expand frontiers of AAC and disrupt speech technology as a whole

Protocol for the Foot in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis trial (FiJIA): a randomised controlled trial of an integrated foot care programme for foot problems in JIA

&lt;b&gt;Background&lt;/b&gt;: Foot and ankle problems are a common but relatively neglected manifestation of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Studies of medical and non-medical interventions have shown that clinical outcome measures can be improved. However existing data has been drawn from small non-randomised clinical studies of single interventions that appear to under-represent the adult population suffering from juvenile idiopathic arthritis. To date, no evidence of combined therapies or integrated care for juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients with foot and ankle problems exists. &lt;b&gt;Methods/design&lt;/b&gt;: An exploratory phase II non-pharmacological randomised controlled trial where patients including young children, adolescents and adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and associated foot/ankle problems will be randomised to receive integrated podiatric care via a new foot care programme, or to receive standard podiatry care. Sixty patients (30 in each arm) including children, adolescents and adults diagnosed with juvenile idiopathic arthritis who satisfy the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be recruited from 2 outpatient centres of paediatric and adult rheumatology respectively. Participants will be randomised by process of minimisation using the Minim software package. The primary outcome measure is the foot related impairment measured by the Juvenile Arthritis Disability Index questionnaire's impairment domain at 6 and 12 months, with secondary outcomes including disease activity score, foot deformity score, active/limited foot joint counts, spatio-temporal and plantar-pressure gait parameters, health related quality of life and semi-quantitative ultrasonography score for inflammatory foot lesions. The new foot care programme will comprise rapid assessment and investigation, targeted treatment, with detailed outcome assessment and follow-up at minimum intervals of 3 months. Data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months from baseline. Intention to treat data analysis will be conducted. A full health economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial and will evaluate the cost effectiveness of the intervention. This will consider the cost per improvement in Juvenile Arthritis Disability Index, and cost per quality adjusted life year gained. In addition, a discrete choice experiment will elicit willingness to pay values and a cost benefit analysis will also be undertaken